Given the impact that midlevel police leaders have on a police organization — and ultimately the delivery of public safety — agencies must have effective mechanisms in place to cultivate, identify, and select the best individuals for these positions. This report presents 47 high-priority expert-identified needs to inform the development and implementation of valid, reliable, and fair promotion processes in police agencies.

Promotions in Law Enforcement

High-Priority Needs for Improving the Process to Identify and Select the Next Generation of Police Leaders

Jeremy D. Barnum, Dustin A. Richardson, Dulani Woods, Kevin D. Lucey, Meagan E. Cahill, Michael J. D. Vermeer, Brian A. Jackson

ResearchPublished Dec 18, 2024

Midlevel police leaders (MLPLs), such as sergeants and lieutenants, have great influence over officers' perceptions, behaviors, and well-being and are crucial for effectuating organizational culture, goals, and objectives. Therefore, they are lynchpins for organizational function, innovation, and change. Given the substantial impact that MLPLs have on a police organization — and ultimately the delivery of public safety — agencies must have mechanisms in place to cultivate, identify, and select the best individuals for these positions. This is achieved through the promotion process — the advancement of organizational members to higher ranks and increased levels of responsibility. In general, the promotion process in police agencies involves some combination of written testing, oral interviews, and assessment center analyses. However, this process lacks uniformity across agencies, and there is a dearth of research on the most-effective ways to conduct police promotions.

On behalf of the National Institute of Justice, RAND and Police Executive Research Forum researchers convened an expert panel to discuss how agencies currently conduct promotions for MLPL positions. Through a series of interviews and a group discussion session, the workshop participants identified and prioritized 47 needs for improving promotions in policing, 26 of which were considered highest priority. These needs are related to bias, disparity, and barriers in promotions; the development of metrics to identify successful candidates; valid and reliable methods to assess candidates; training and career progression; and considerations about transparency and organizational justice.

Key Findings

  • Some promotion policies, practices, or accepted norms in some agencies may be in violation of employment law.
  • The existence of or lack of organizational policies (e.g., assignments, training opportunities, bargaining agreements, promotion procedures, accommodations for family circumstances) can create barriers that prevent some employees, particularly women and people of color, from pursuing promotions or being successful in the promotion process.
  • Although it is important to evaluate past performance, it is currently challenging to use performance evaluations as a metric in the promotion process because evaluation processes are inadequate, inconsistent, and inequitable.
  • There is a lack of longitudinal and follow-up research with people who have gone through the promotion process and served in leadership roles to assess the promotion process.
  • Human assessments are inherently subjective, which can lead to inconsistency, and are subject to intentional and unintentional bias. Agencies lack processes for selection, preparation, tools, and oversight for rater selection.
  • There are no standards or best practices for how stakeholders (e.g., community members, staff from other police agencies, members of the civil service commission, or representatives from other criminal justice and government agencies) should be involved in promotion processes.
  • Police agencies are not doing enough to provide transparent, fair, equitable, and reasonable assistance to their employees preparing for the promotion process.
  • Some police agencies provide insufficient constructive feedback to individuals who participated in a promotion process in an honest and respectful way. This prevents employees from remaining engaged and motivated and exposes agencies to turnover and legal liability.

Recommendations

  • Develop educational materials, curricula, and resource guides that summarize what organizations and employees should know about employment law.
  • Conduct quantitative and qualitative research to identify disparate barriers to promotion for otherwise qualified candidates.
  • Develop and validate metrics to evaluate performance across positions.
  • Conduct qualitative and quantitative research to identify challenges and successes from the perspective of the agency leaders who managed the process.
  • Conduct longitudinal research to identify challenges and successes from the perspective of the candidates who went through the process.
  • Conduct a systematic review to identify evidence-based best practices for selecting, training, and overseeing evaluators or raters.
  • Develop a best-practices guide to help agencies appropriately include stakeholders in promotion processes.
  • Develop a best-practices guide based on what effective agencies (and those in other industries) are already doing.
  • Develop training experiments that evaluate different feedback models.

Topics

Document Details

Citation

RAND Style Manual

Barnum, Jeremy D., Dustin A. Richardson, Dulani Woods, Kevin D. Lucey, Meagan E. Cahill, Michael J. D. Vermeer, and Brian A. Jackson, Promotions in Law Enforcement: High-Priority Needs for Improving the Process to Identify and Select the Next Generation of Police Leaders, RAND Corporation, RR-A108-29, 2024. As of April 30, 2025: https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RRA108-29.html

Chicago Manual of Style

Barnum, Jeremy D., Dustin A. Richardson, Dulani Woods, Kevin D. Lucey, Meagan E. Cahill, Michael J. D. Vermeer, and Brian A. Jackson, Promotions in Law Enforcement: High-Priority Needs for Improving the Process to Identify and Select the Next Generation of Police Leaders. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation, 2024. https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RRA108-29.html.
BibTeX RIS

Research conducted by

The research described in this report was supported by the National Institute of Justice and conducted by the Justice Policy Program within RAND Social and Economic Well-Being.

This publication is part of the RAND research report series. Research reports present research findings and objective analysis that address the challenges facing the public and private sectors. All RAND research reports undergo rigorous peer review to ensure high standards for research quality and objectivity.

This document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law. This representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for noncommercial use only. Unauthorized posting of this publication online is prohibited; linking directly to this product page is encouraged. Permission is required from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of its research documents for commercial purposes. For information on reprint and reuse permissions, please visit www.rand.org/pubs/permissions.

RAND is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.